4.  The applicants were born in 1960, 1955, 1974, 1924, 1955, 1957 and 1970 respectively. The first, second and the seventh applicants live in Istanbul, the fourth and the fifth applicants live in Erzincan and the sixth applicant is residing in Nevnkirchen (Austria).
5.  The fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh applicants are relatives of Mr Süleyman Yeter, who died on 7 March 1999.
6.  According to the applicants, on 22 February 1997 Mr Süleyman Yeter was arrested by police officers while walking along the street, in Avcılar, Istanbul, and taken into police custody at the Istanbul Security Headquarters on suspicion of membership of an illegal armed organisation, namely the MLKP (Marxist Leninist Communist Party). According to the arrest report, drafted by police officers, Mr Yeter was arrested at an apartment, together with eight other people. The arrest report does not contain the signatures of those arrested.
7.  That same day, the first three applicants - Mr Erdoğan Yılmaz, Ms Birsen Kaya and Ms Ayşe Yılmaz - were also arrested at their houses and taken into police custody at the Istanbul Security Headquarters on suspicion of involvement in the activities of the MLKP.
8.  The head of the security headquarters requested the public prosecutor at the Istanbul State Security Court to authorise the police to detain Mr Süleyman Yeter, as well as the first three applicants and fourteen others, until 7 March 1997. The public prosecutor gave his consent to detain them for fifteen days. He also noted that the detainees should be taken for a medical examination every three days.
9.  The first three applicants and Mr Süleyman Yeter were allegedly subjected to various forms of ill-treatment while in custody. It is claimed that Mr Erdoğan Yılmaz was blindfolded, beaten, suspended by his arms, subjected to electric shocks, forced to remain standing, deprived of food and sleep and threatened with death. Mrs Ayşe Yılmaz was allegedly blindfolded, beaten, sexually harassed, forced to remain standing, forced to listen to loud music, deprived of sleep and threatened. It is further claimed that Ms Birsen Kaya was blindfolded, beaten, insulted, stripped naked, suspended by her arms and forced to remain standing. Finally, Mr Süleyman Yeter was allegedly blindfolded, beaten, insulted, hosed with cold water, suspended by his arms, forced to listen to loud music and deprived of sleep.
10. During his police custody, the first applicant, Mr Erdoğan Yılmaz, was examined three times by a forensic doctor:
-In a report dated 26 February 1997, it was noted that the applicant               had a lesion measuring 0,5 cm on his right elbow and a scab-covered               lesion measuring 3 to 4 cm on the left scapula.
-The second examination of the applicant was carried out on 3 March 1997. It was noted that the applicant had a scab-covered               lesion measuring 1 cm by 1 cm on his left elbow, several               hyperaemic lesions measuring 1 cm by 2 cm on his back and               bruising measuring 2 cm by 1 cm on his right wrist.
-In his third examination, carried out on 6 March 1997, the forensic               doctor noted that the findings of the report dated 3 March 1997 still               showed. He also observed that the applicant had pain in his chest.
11.  The second applicant Ayşe Yılmaz was taken to the doctor on 26 February, 3 March and 6 March 1997 respectively. According to the first two reports, there were no traces of ill-treatment on her body. The medical report of 6 March 1997 noted that she was examined together with some other detainees. However, there were no comments regarding her. Following her release, the second applicant applied to the Istanbul Human Rights Foundation for a medical report. In the report, which was drafted on 23 October 1997, it was recorded that the applicant had scab covered lesions on her wrists, had pain on her right elbow and several other small scab covered lesions on both arms.
12.  The third applicant, Ms Birsen Kaya was also examined three times during the police custody period.
- In a report dated 27 February 1997, prepared by a doctor at the Vakıf Gureba Hospital, it was noted that the applicant had numbness in her left shoulder and wrist and that she was unable to move her left hand.
- In a medical report dated 4 March 1997, which was issued at the Istanbul Forensic Medicine Institute, it was noted that the applicant had a scab covered lesion measuring 10 cm. on her back, had pain and numbness on her left arm and could not use her left hand.
- On 6 March 1997 the applicant was once again examined at the Istanbul Forensic Medicine Institute. In a report drafted on that day it was observed that the injuries which had been noted on 4 March 1997 still showed.
13.  The relative of the fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh applicants, Mr Süleyman Yeter, was also given three medical examinations during his detention in police custody:
- The first was performed by a doctor at the Vakıf Gureba Hospital on               27 February 1997, who noted a scab-covered lesion measuring 5              cm
to the side of the right armpit.
-In a report of 3 March 1997, a forensic doctor noted pain and               numbness in both of Mr Süleyman Yeter’s arms, extending to his               fingertips. He also noted pain on his scapula. He certified him unfit               for work for three days.
-According the medical report dated 6 March 1997, drafted by a               different forensic doctor, there was loss of movement in both of his               arms and bruising measuring 1 cm on the right scapula.
14.  On 6 March 1997, the first three applicants and Mr Süleyman Yeter were brought to the office of the public prosecutor at the Istanbul State Security Court, where they denied all accusations against them. They also described in detail the treatment to which they had been allegedly subjected in police custody. Mr Süleyman Yeter was not able to sign his statement, as he could not move his arms. Later, that same day Mr Süleyman Yeter was remanded in custody by a judge at the Istanbul State Security Court, whereas the first three applicants were released pending trial.
15.  On 10 March 1997 Mr Süleyman Yeter filed a complaint with the Fatih Public Prosecutor against the police officers who had allegedly tortured him during his detention. In his written statement, submitted through the prison authorities, he gave a detailed description of the methods of torture inflicted on him.
16.  On 17 March 1997 the public prosecutor at the Istanbul State Security Court forwarded to the Fatih Public Prosecutor statements by the first three applicants and Mr Süleyman Yeter, complaining about the police officers’ conduct during their detention and the relevant medical reports, and requested him to carry out the necessary investigation.
17.  On 31 March 1997 the Fatih Public Prosecutor requested the Istanbul Security Headquarters to provide his office with all relevant documents concerning the complainants’ detention in police custody.
18.  On 28 March 1997 and 2 April 1997 the head of the Istanbul Security Headquarters submitted the public prosecutor’s authorisation to detain the suspects, the arrest reports, the incident reports, medical reports and the list of names of the police officers involved.
19.  On 8 May 1997 the Fatih Public Prosecutor took statements from all the police officers who had been on duty between 21 February 1997 and 6 March 1997. On 23 June 1997 he drew up a report in which he recommended that the Istanbul Public Prosecutor initiate criminal proceedings against eight police officers, pursuant to Article 243 of the Criminal Code. On 4 July 1997 the Istanbul Public Prosecutor filed an indictment against eight officers before the Istanbul Assize Court, accusing them of ill-treatment pursuant to Articles 243 of the Criminal Code. The first two applicants were included in the proceedings as complainants, whereas the third applicant and Mr Süleyman Yeter joined the case as intervening parties.
20.  The first hearing took place on 24 October 1997. The Istanbul Assize Court heard Mr Erdoğan Yılmaz and Ms Ayşe Yılmaz, who described the ill-treatment inflicted on them by the police. The first applicant maintained that he had been suspended by the arms and insulted and that he had remained handcuffed for six days. The second applicant complained that during the first five days of her detention she had been blindfolded, beaten, threatened, insulted and forced to listen to loud music. Both applicants claimed that they would be able to identify the police officers who had tortured them and they also provided the name of one police officer. On the same day, a statement by Mr Süleyman Yeter, which had been taken by the Gebze Assize Court by means of a rogatory letter, was read out in court.
21.  On 16 December 1997 the accused police officers appeared before the Istanbul Assize Court for the first time. They refused to give any statements as their lawyers were not present.
22.  On 7 May 1998 all the accused police officers, except one, and their lawyers were present in court. According to the minutes, they denied the allegations against them.
23.  On 7 July 1998, relying on the nature of the offence and the content of the case file and considering the fact that they all had permanent jobs and addresses, the court rejected the request that the accused officers be remanded in custody.
24.  At a hearing on 2 October 1998, a witness identified someone in the audience as one of the police officers who had tortured her. Subsequently, the public prosecutor filed a separate indictment against that individual and the number of the accused increased from eight to nine persons.
25.  On 10 December 1998 the court took a statement from the third applicant, Ms Birsen Kaya, who testified that she had been suspended by the arms and sexually harassed. She further maintained that the doctor who had examined her had not noted all her complaints. When she had asked the doctor for his name in order to file a complaint, he had refused to give it. Furthermore, she complained that, on the way back to the prison, a police officer whose name she had given to the court had slapped her and squeezed her throat.
26.  At the hearing on 2 March 1999, the court decided to confront the accused police officers and the plaintiffs at the next hearing on 29 April 1999.
27.  On 5 March 1999, police officers from the Anti-Terrorist Branch of the Istanbul Security Headquarters arrested Süleyman Yeter, who had been released from detention on remand apparently in the meantime, and placed him into custody once again. On 7 March 1999 he died in police custody[1].
28.  On 29 April 1999 the confrontation procedure was not performed as the accused police officers were not present in court. Mr Süleyman Yeter’s lawyer informed the court that his relatives, that is, the fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh applicants, would pursue his case.
29.  At the hearing of 1 October 1999, the police officers appeared before the court for the first time since 7 May 1998. However, the court decided to postpone the confrontation procedure.
30.  The next hearing took place on 23 November 1999. The police officers were not present.
31.  During several hearings, the plaintiffs repeated their request that the police officers be remanded in custody. The court reiterated its earlier decision on the subject, holding that, since there had not been any change in the content of the case file, there was no need to decide otherwise.
32.  On 8 July 2002 the public prosecutor submitted his opinion on the merits of the case. He maintained that witness statements and medical reports confirmed the allegations that the complainants had been subjected to psychological and physical torture inflicted by some of the accused police officers. He therefore requested the court to convict and sentence those officers pursuant to Article 243 of the Criminal Code.
33.  In the meantime, on 16 October 2002 the Istanbul State Security Court acquitted Mr Erdoğan Yılmaz, Ms Ayşe Yılmaz and Ms Birsen Kaya of the charges against them and dropped the charges against Mr Süleyman Yeter, since he had died.
34. In a hearing on 2 December 2002 the Istanbul Assize Court gave judgment. It acquitted five of the accused police officers for lack of evidence. Furthermore, based on the evidence in the file, the court found it established that the remaining four officers from the Anti-Terrorist Branch of the Istanbul Security Headquarters had intentionally ill-treated Mr Erdoğan Yılmaz, Ms Ayşe Yılmaz, Ms Birsen Kaya and Mr Süleyman Yeter in order to extract confessions from them. Accordingly, pursuant to Section 243 § 1 of the Criminal Code, the court sentenced each of them to one year and two months’ imprisonment. It also made an order banning them from public service for three months and fifteen days. These sentences were subsequently reduced to eleven months and twenty days’ imprisonment and two months and twenty-seven days’ suspension from duty under Section 59 § 2 of the Criminal Code. The court then ordered a stay of execution, as the defendants had no criminal record and the judges were convinced that they would not reoffend.
35.  On 1 April 2004 the Court of Cassation upheld the assize court’s decision to acquit five of the police officers. However, it quashed the decision to convict the other four, noting that the statutory time-limit for the offence had expired and that, accordingly, the criminal proceedings against them should be discontinued.
36.  On 11 November 2004 the Istanbul Assize Court followed the decision of the Court of Cassation and dropped the criminal proceedings against the police officers.
37.  On 29 November 2006 the Court of Cassation rejected an appeal application from the intervening parties.